Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Straight up: Who are you sold on at #9?


davos

Recommended Posts

Let's say we don't move/trade and we pick, which guys outside the obvious are you definitely sold on for us?

I'm not just saying who will be good but who fits and who makes the most sense.

I've really come to like Harris and James Young (Hardaway-esque at times)

Overall, I find the class outside of the 2s kinda hard to figure out so thought this could be a good draft build up thread.

Whatsayyou??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sold on the shooting of Staskas and McDermott but not their defense

 

I am sold on the scoring ability of TJW but not his jump shot or court awareness.

 

I am not really 100% sold on any of them, but if I were they probably wouldn't be available at #9.

 

I do think this is a deep class where you will be able to get a quality player at #9 with several different options

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's say we don't move/trade and we pick, which guys outside the obvious are you definitely sold on for us?

I'm not just saying who will be good but who fits and who makes the most sense.

I've really come to like Harris and James Young (Hardaway-esque at times)

Overall, I find the class outside of the 2s kinda hard to figure out so thought this could be a good draft build up thread.

Whatsayyou??

Other than the top projected 8 guys:

(1) Harris

(2) Young

(3) Lavine

(4) Ennis

(5) Stauskas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other than the top projected 8 guys:

(1) Harris

(2) Young

(3) Lavine

(4) Ennis

(5) Stauskas

 

I do not want Lavine.  He is a low production work out warrior.  He may end up being the Bismack Biyombo of guards.

 

And would you rather have Ennis over Payton?   I have my questions about Payton, but I would take him over Ennis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not want Lavine. He is a low production work out warrior. He may end up being the Bismack Biyombo of guards.

And would you rather have Ennis over Payton? I have my questions about Payton, but I would take him over Ennis

I agree with you on Lavine, but the kid can straight up knock down 3s. Boy has deep NBA range. I'm not even talking about wanting him due to huge upside and athleticism. I could careless about that.

I'm a fan of Payton, but Ennis is a day 1 starter. Much safer pick and high basketball IQ. Size is the only concern.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...